Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > I have seen that too. I did not think about enforcing c++98. Shall I try > that?
I think that would be a good idea at least for newer compilers (e.g. for gcc version 5 and newer, for clang probably always). > The alternative would be to enforce c++11 for 2.2, but I am not sure > that all of our supported platforma sare ready for that. I have the > feeling that we discussed that already, but I cannot find it. IIRC we decided that it is too early for 2.2 and to require C++11 for the next major version after 2.2. Otherwise we could already get rid of some boost parts. Georg
